Archive | Italy RSS feed for this section

The Red Phoenix Interview with Alfonso Casal

31 Mar

agd13

The protests against Golden Dawn around the world gained much media attention, including the one in Chicago where you were the key note speaker.   What happened at this Jan. 19th event?

Well, I was the “MC” for want of a better term.  The event was held for, essentially, two reasons:  Golden Dawn announced that there were opening a Chicago-area office and a call had come from Greece for an international day of solidarity rejecting fascism and austerity measures and in support of the struggle of the Greek people.

You work with the American Party of Labor (APL). What role did the APL and other left-wing organizations play in organizing the action against Golden Dawn?

I have to give a tremendous shout-out to Chris Geovanis and Stavroula Harissis – if it weren’t for them, this event likely would never have taken place.  It was Chris who first reached out to folks and pulled the event together.  She is a tireless worker, and her energy and commitment really galvanized everything.  For her efforts she’s been targeted by local fascists, who’ve sent her a number of pretty vile and threatening phone calls and email.  Stavroula did the leg work to connect with the Greek-American community, and gave a beautiful and moving speech at the event itself.  These two comrades were really the heart and soul of the event.

The APL was present from the very first organizing session for the demo; and aided with publicity, communicating with the broad-Left, putting together the list of endorsers, and managing outreach through the event’s Facebook page.  The International Socialist Organization (ISO) was also present from the first.  The event itself drew people from the APL and ISO, of course; the Freedom Road Socialist Organization (FRSO); the Wobblies; the Communist Party, USA (CPUSA); various unions were represented; and, more local groups such as Radicals Against Discrimination.  All-in-all it was a respectable turnout considering the short turnaround time, two weeks, we had to bring it all together.

What can you tell us about the situation in Greece?

There has been an escalating level of popular protest and mass struggle in Greece going back to 2010 when the Greek government announced severe cutbacks in social services that were part of an austerity program the government promised the EU and the IMF in return for a 110 billion Euro bailout.  Over the past three years, as the world financial crisis deepened and the Greek economy edged near collapse, the protest movement became more militant.

Predictably, this is when Golden Dawn first appeared.  It’s an almost textbook example of capitalism turning to its most reactionary and terroristic elements to save its skin in the face of rising working class and popular discontent.  During the 2012 protests, it became public knowledge that Golden Dawn had a strong presence within the Greek police and security apparat.  Although to what extent it’s managed to penetrate other organs of Greek officialdom is unknown, Golden Dawn did manage to successfully field electoral candidates in May and June of 2012.

What are the implications of this electoral strengthening of fascism in Greece?

The implications are very serious.  An openly fascist, Neo-Nazi party now sits in the Greek Parliament.  It can influence policy and legislation; and, in future, it can run for a seat in the European Parliament.

Would you describe the political ideology that motivates Golden Dawn’s actions?

Well, Golden Dawn likes to be coy in public.  Supposedly, it rejects being labeled as fascist or Nazi, and, instead claims to be inspired by right-wing dictator Ioannis Metaxas. This is just word-play on Golden Dawn’s part.  Metaxas was dictator of Greece in the 1930s and his regime was thoroughly fascist, from insisting that Metaxas be styled as the “Archigos” (leader) which is the Greek equivalent of “Duce” or “Fuhrer”, down to corporatist economics, book burnings, and intense anti-communism.

Can you elaborate on fascism? What is it and how do we fight it?

Ah!  One could write books on the subject!  Essentially fascism is the dictatorship of the most reactionary, most terroristic elements of capitalism.  In a sense, fascism is the last resort of capitalism. When capitalism feels true threatened, either by the mass action of the people or by its own failures and contradictions, it pulls out all the stops.  It sheds its veneer of liberal democracy.  Fascism is the result.  Ideologically, fascism combines militarism, corporatism, populist nationalism, and glorification of unlimited counter-revolutionary violence.   Now, other right-wing and reactionary movements might have one or another of these features; but, fascism combines them all.  Fascism also tries to create – and this is really one of the things that distinguishes fascism – a counter-revolutionary mass movement.  This “mass movement,” usually composed of petty-bourgeois and lumpen elements, are the fascist “storm troopers”  — the “Blackshirts,” the “Brownshirts.”

We fight fascism by actively and militantly opposing it wherever, whenever, and however it may appear.  We fight through education, by raising people’s consciousness and awareness of what fascism is and the menace it poses; and we fight in the streets, through marches, protests, and demonstrations.

What are the recent activities of the Golden Dawn organization? Have they been driven back or are they making advances?

The battle is far from over.  I already mentioned Golden Dawn’s recent electoral gains.  They have been responsible for numerous acts of racist and anti-immigrant violence in Greece; and there are signs that they are attempting to link up with similar fascist and neo-Nazi groups in Germany, Italy, Spain, and here in the US.  The danger is very real.  The one thing that can stop them, the one thing that history shows has always been able to stop them, is the organized mass action of working people.  Like the thugs and cowards they are, when we say “NO!” they often run and hide.

What are the implications of this anti-fascist movement against Golden Dawn internationally and in the U.S.?

Fascism is on the rise.  It’s not just a question of groups like Golden Dawn in Greece, or the KKK and white supremacists here.  Rather, reactionary movements like the “Tea Party” in this country and the “National Front” in Britain are a very real danger and a warning of what could happen should fascism remain unopposed.

What does the APL support politically? You are deliberately different from most other activist and protest groups in terms of how you organize, correct?

The APL is a Marxist-Leninist party. As a party we stand for socialism, for a lasting peace, and for a peoples’ democracy; a true democracy; a democracy by and for the working class.  Not just one where every few years people get to choose their oppressors.   We see ourselves as having no interests apart from those of working class people; and we see our role as that of organizing working people around those interests, and of giving a deeper, scientific, Marxist-Leninist understanding to the various progressive and popular struggles taking place.

What has been the experience of anti-fascist coalitions and organizations organizing in Chicago?

Positive.  We were able to mobilize a respectable number of people in a very short time.  I think this speaks not only to the skill and energy of the organizers, as I said before, but to the fact the people recognize the importance of the issue.  The very real threat fascism poses; not just in Greece, not just here in the US, but worldwide.

What lessons should we draw from this?

That fascism not only can be challenged, but must be challenged!  That ordinary people are not powerless; and that the defeatist mantra of “what can I do?” is false.  We working people can organize in the defense of our interests; we can stand up for our rights; and we can win!

Where do we go from here?

We keep organizing and we keep fighting.  The stronger our response to fascism and fascist measures, the more militant our actions, the more we raise the level of people’s consciousness as to what fascism is and the danger it poses,  the more we bring other working people into the struggle.

How can people get involved?

By joining social justice organizations, by organizing in your school or union – by joining the APL!

::Casal smiles broadly::

Land sold off and used for biofuels could have fed 1 billion people – report

5 Oct

Indian labourers work in a field of Jatropha in the village of Hassan, some 250 kms from Bangalore. Jatropha, a wild shrub that grows abundantly across India, has been hailed as an eco-friendly solution to the energy needs. (AFP Photo / Mission Biofuels India)

2 million kilometers of foreign purchased land in developing countries is either idle or used for Western biofuel production, according to a British charity. Oxfam’s report estimates an area the size of London is sold every six days.

The report states that between 2000 and 2010, 60% of investment in agricultural land by foreign traders occurred in developing countries with hunger problems.

Yet two thirds of those investors plan to export everything they produce. While 60% of deals are to produce crops that can be used for biofuels. Land can also be left idle, as speculators wait for its value to increase.

Oxfam estimates that this land could have fed 1 billion people.

According to the International Land Coalition, an NGO based in Italy, 106 million hectares of land in developing countries has been acquired by foreign investors in a period between 2000-2010, with some disastrous results.

30% of all land in Liberia has been handed out in large scale concessions in the last 5 years, while up to 63% of all available land in Cambodia has been passed on to private companies.

Farmers forced out

Oxfam emphasizes that much of the land sold off was already being used for small scale and subsistence farming or other types of natural resource use.

The report dismissed claims by the World Bank that most of the sold land remains idle, waiting to be developed. In fact most agricultural land deals target quality farm land, particularly land that is irrigated and offers good access to markets.

A 2010 study by the Independent Evaluation Group (IEG) – the official monitoring and evaluation body of the World Bank – supported Oxfam’s findings.

It found that 30% of World Bank projects involved involuntary resettlement. The study estimated that 1 million people are involuntarily resettled in projects financed by the World Bank.

In some cases people were violently evicted from their land without consultation or compensation.

Barbara Stocking, Oxfam’s chief executive, told British newspaper the Guardian that, “The rush for land is out of control and some of the world’s poorest people are suffering hunger, violence and greater poverty as a result. The World Bank is in a unique position to help stop land grabs becoming one of the biggest scandals of the century.”

Internally displaced children line up to receive a food ration at a food distribution point at a voluntary centre in Mogadishu, Somalia. (AFP Photo / Mohamed Dahir)


Freeze investments

Oxfam has urged the World Bank to freeze its investments in large scale land acquisitions in poor nations.

In the last decade the World Bank has tripled its support for land projects to $6-$8 billion a year, but it does not provide data on how much of this goes to land acquisition or any connection between lending and conflict in a country.

Oxfam wants the World Bank to make sure that information about land deals is publicly accessible, that communities are informed in advance and have the right to agree to or refuse to participate in projects.

Stocking said that the UK, as one of the banks largest shareholders and next year’s president of the G8, should try and get these land deals frozen.

“The UK should also show leadership in reversing flawed biofuels targets, which are a main driver for land and are diverting food into fuel. It can also play a crucial role as president of the G8 next year by putting food and hunger at the heart of the agenda,” Stocking said.

But in a statement released to the Guardian, the international Finance Corporation (IFC), the World Bank’s private lending arm, defended its past transactions.

“IFC does not finance land acquisitions for speculative purposes. We invest in productive agricultural and forestry enterprises that can be land intensive to help provide the food and fiber the world needs.”

Source

Cold terror for Europe: 550 dead, tens of thousands snowed in

11 Feb

A man walks near a car covered by snow in the city of Nevesinje, which has gone without water and electricity for the past five days after power lines and infrastructure were damaged by heavy snowfall in eastern Bosnia.(REUTERS)

Snow drifts reaching up to rooftops kept tens of thousands of villagers prisoners in their own homes Saturday as the death toll from Europe’s big freeze rose past 550.

More heavy snow fell on the Balkans and in Italy, while the Danube river, already closed to shipping for hundreds of kilometres (miles) because of thick ice, froze over in Bulgaria for the first time in 27 years.

Montenegro’s capital of Podgorica was brought to a standstill by snow 50 centimetres (20 inches) deep, a 50-year record, closing the city’s airport and halting rail services to Serbia because of an avalanche.

Eight more people were reported to have died in Romania, taking the toll for the country to 65, three in Serbia, one in the Czech Republic and one in Austria.

Polish fire brigade spokesman Pawel Fratcak said Saturday that defective heating had triggered a spate of deadly blazes in houses and apartments, with eight people killed on Friday night and three the night before.

New Romanian Prime Minister Mihai Razvan Ungureanu and his defence and interior ministers, who were sworn in only on Thursday, flew by helicopter to the eastern Buzau region, one of the worst hit, on Saturday.

He called on the authorities to work hard to beat the challenges facing them, as food threatened to run out in some villages in spite of air drops.

At Carligul Mic firemen and volunteers helped people dig tunnels and trenches in the snow reaching to the house roofs in some places.

“I’ve never seen as much snow in my whole life,” resident Aneta Dumitrache, 78, told an AFP photographer.

Authorities said an estimated 30,000 people were still cut off in Romania, and more than 110,000 in the Balkan countries, including 60,000 in Montenegro, nearly 10 percent of the population.

Belgrade has taken steps to limit electricity consumption in the face of threatened shortages, calling on companies to reduce their activities to a minimum.

With Wednesday and Thursday already public holidays for Serbia’s national day, the government has also declared Friday a non-working day to extend into next weekend.

Forecasters expect the cold snap, which started two weeks ago, to continue until mid-February.

In Italy Rome was again blanketed by snow for the second time in a week, but authorities seemed to have learned from their previous experience, when the capital was brought to a halt.

Public transport functioned almost normally, thanks to 700 snowploughs and gritters mobilised, but other parts of the country, especially the south where snow is extremely rare, were having difficulties.

In the Calabria region, Campana’s mayor Pasquale Manfredi, where many villages were cut off, likened the weather to “an earthquake without the shaking.”

On the French Mediterranean island of Corsica snow was up to one metre thick in the higher villages and all flights were cancelled from Bastia airport.

Many people are determined to enjoy the icy conditions to their utmost, however.

Thousands have taken to frozen lakes and rivers, including the Aussenalster lake at Hamburg in northern Germany, iced over for the first time in 15 years, which is mounting a huge festival expected to attact one million people over the weekend.

In Poland ice yachting or ice-surfing, on a surfboard equipped with skates, are the rage, while in the Czech Republic tourists have flocked to the village of Kvilda, reckoned to be one of the coldest in the country, for the experience of camping out in temperatures of up to minus 39 Celsius (minus 38 Fahrenheit).

Source

Chaos and carnage as Europe freezes – Death Toll from Freeze Reaches 175

5 Feb

THE big freeze gripping Europe has claimed the lives of 175 people – with forecasters warning: “It’s only going to get colder.”

Temperatures have tumbled below -10C in most capital cities, with 38 people dying from frostbite in Ukraine and black ice causing chaos and carnage on roads.

Forecasters said the cold snap, which has gripped a large swath of the continent from Russia to Serbia has reached as far west as the Netherlands.

In Ukraine, the hardest hit country, health officials have told hospitals to stop discharging the hundreds of homeless patients after they are treated for hypothermia and frostbite. The goal is to prevent them from dying once they are released into temperatures as low as -32C.

In Serbia, at least 11,000 villagers are stranded in their homes by heavy snow and blizzards which have hit remote areas that cannot be reached due to icy, snow-clogged roads.

The worst weather is near Serbia’s southwestern town of Sijenica, where it has been freezing cold or snowing for 26 days, and diesel fuel supplies used by snowploughs to clear roads are running low.

Snow fell in Rome for the first time in 26 years as freezing temperatures.

The Italian capital is usually blessed by a moderate climate but the snowfall prompted authorities stop visitors from entering the Colosseum, the Roman Forum and the Palatine Hill, the former home of Rome’s ancient emperors.

The last substantial snowfalls in Rome were in 1985 and 1986, though there have been other cases of lighter snow since then.The director of the Colosseum, Rossella Rea, said the sites were closed out of fears that visitors could slip on ice.

Snow began falling late on Friday morning, forming slush on the roads. It wasn’t clear if there would be any significant accumulation on the ground.

France reported its first frost victim on Friday, an elderly man suffering from Alzheimer’s who became lost overnight in a forest in the north-eastern Moselle region wearing only his pyjamas. The temperature dropped to -16C.

Ukraine Health Minister Mykola Blyznyuk said that many of the victims of hypothermia had broken their legs in falls and spent a long time in freezing temperatures while waiting for help to arrive.

Of the Ukrainians who have died since the cold spell hit on January 27, some 64 people were found frozen on the streets, 11 died in hospitals and 26 in their homes.

It comes after the British Met Office raised fears for the elderly and ill by issuing its first level 3 cold weather alert of the winter yesterday.

Severe weather warnings forecast icy conditions and snow in much of England over the weekend.

Source

Occupy Wall Street Protests Go Global: Protests & Clashes in Rome

16 Oct

Riot police have fought militant protesters in Rome as the biggest of a series of global rallies against banks and politicians tipped into violence.

At least 70 people were injured, three of them seriously, as police fought masked rioters with tear gas, water cannon and batons.

Other protesters tried to stop the rioters as they attacked cars and businesses, marring a peaceful rally.

The day saw coordinated protests in cities worldwide, most of them small.

Inspired by the Occupy Wall St movement and Spain’s “Indignants”, demonstrators turned out from Asia to Europe and back to New York for an event organisers said on their website was aimed at initiating “global change”.

“United in one voice, we will let politicians, and the financial elites they serve, know it is up to us, the people, to decide our future,” they added.

Masked militants

Tens of thousands of people had turned out to demonstrate peacefully in Rome.

Television pictures from the city showed streets packed with protesters waving banners, close to the Colosseum.

However militants dressed in black infiltrated the crowd and began attacking property. Offices belonging to the Italian defence ministry were set on fire, some cars were burnt including an armoured police vehicle, in addition to attacks on cash dispensers and bank and shop windows.

The militants were challenged by other protesters, the BBC’s David Willey reports from Rome. “No to violence!” they shouted and tried to restrain them. The injured included at least 30 police officers.

There was a message of support for the global day of protest from the chief of the Bank of Italy, Mario Draghi, who is set to take over as head of the European Central Bank (ECB) next month.

“Young people are right to be indignant,” he was quoted by Italian media as saying.

“They’re angry against the world of finance. I understand them… We adults are angry about the crisis. Can you imagine people who are in their twenties or thirties?”

Outside the ECB itself in Frankfurt, Germany, thousands of people gathered to protest on Saturday.

A 27-year-old schoolteacher who gave his name only as Tobias told AFP news agency: “I see the global capitalist system as a time bomb for humans but also for the planet.

“Our well-being is financed to the detriment of other countries, [and] the ECB represents this unjust and murderous system.”

Evening rally

Tens of thousands of people filled central Madrid on Saturday evening, the BBC’s Sarah Rainsford reports from the Spanish capital.

People of all ages, from pensioners to children, and many of the young unemployed, gathered on Puerta del Sol Square, where the “Indignant” movement was launched in May. Organisers put the numbers at half a million.

In other developments:

  • Hundreds of protesters marched through New York and the streets of downtown Washington DC
  • In Greece, about 2,000 people rallied outside parliament in Athens and a similar number reportedly turned out in the second city, Thessaloniki
  • At least 1,000 people demonstrated in London’s financial district but were prevented by police from reaching the Stock Exchange, and five arrests were made
  • In Dublin, about 400 people marched to a hotel where an EU/IMF/ECB delegation involved in the country’s ongoing financial bailout is staying, the Irish Times reports
  • Hundreds of people marched in New Zealand cities while in Sydney, Australia, some 2,000 people – including representatives of Aboriginal groups, communists and trade unionists – rallied outside the central Reserve Bank of Australia
  • “Occupy” protests were also held in South Korea, the Philippines, Taiwan and Hong Kong

Observers say that, while the original protesters in Spain had concrete demands such as seeking a cut in working hours to tackle unemployment, many “Occupy” protesters are vague in their demands.

Source

Libya: Popular Uprising, Civilian War or Military Attack?

9 Apr

Interview: Grégoire Lalieu & Michel Collon

After Tunisia and Egypt, has the Arab revolution reached Libya ?
What is happening at the moment in Libya is different. In Tunisia and Egypt, the lack of freedom was flagrant. However, it was the appalling social conditions which really drove young people to rebel. The Tunisians and Egyptians had no hope for the future.
In Libya, Muammar Gadaffi’s regime is corrupt, monopolises a large part of the country’s wealth and has always severely repressed any opposition. But the social conditions of Libyan people are better than in neighbouring countries. Life expectancy in Libya is higher than in the rest of Africa. The health and education systems are good. Libya, moreover, is one of the first African countries to have eradicated malaria. While there are major inequalities in the distribution of wealth, GDP per inhabitant is about $11,000 – one of the highest in the Arab world. You will not therefore find in Libya the same objective conditions that led to the popular uprisings in Tunisia and Egypt.

How then do you explain what is happening in Libya ?
In order to understand current events properly, we should place them in their historic context. Libya was formerly an Ottoman province. In 1835 France took over Algeria. Meanwhile Mohamed Ali, the Egyptian governor under the Ottoman Empire, was implementing ever more independent policies. With the French installed in Algeria on the one hand, and Mohamed Ali in Egypt on the other hand, the Ottomans were fearful of losing control of the region. They sent their troops to Libya.
At the time the Senoussis Brotherhood was highly influential in the country. It had been founded by Sayid Mohammed Ibn Ali as Senoussi, an Algerian who, after studying in his own country and in Morocco, went to preach his version of Islam in Tunisia and Libya. At the start of the 19th century, Senoussie began to attract numerous followers, but he was not much appreciated by certain of the Ottoman religious authorities who criticised him in their sermons. After spending some time in Egypt and in Mecca, Sennoussi decided to exile himself permanently in Cyrenaica, in the east of Libya.
His Brotherhood grew there and organised life in the región, levying taxes, resolving disputes between tribes, etc. It even had its own army and offered its services escorting merchants’ caravans passing through the area. Finally his Senoussis Brotherhood became the de facto government of Cyrenaica, expanding its influence even as far as northern Chad. But then the European colonial powers installed themselves in Africa, dividing the sub-Saharan part of the continent. That had a negative impact on the Senoussis. Libya’s invasion by Italy also seriously undermined the Brotherhood’s regional hegemony.

In 2008 Italy paid compensation to Libya for the crimes of the colonialists. Was colonisation as terrible as all that ? Or did Berlusconi want to be seen in a good light in order to be able to conclude commercial contracts with Gaddafi ?
The colonisation of Libya was dreadful. At the beginning of the 20th century, a fascist government began spreading propaganda claiming that Italy, which had been defeated by the Ethiopian army at the battle of Adoua in 1896, needed to re-establish the supremacy of the white man over the black continent. It was necessary to cleanse the great civilised nation of the affront inflicted on it by the barbarians. This propaganda claimed that Libya was a country of savages, inhabited by a few backward nomads and it would be good for Italians to instal themselves in this pleasant region with its picture postcard beauty.
The invasion of Libya arose out of the Italian-Turkish war of 1911 – a particularly bloody conflict which ended in victory for Italy a year later. Nevertheless, the European power only gained control of the Tripoli region and met with fierce resistance in the rest of the country, especially in Cyrenaica. The Sennousi clan supported Omar al-Mokhtar who led a remarkable guerrilla struggle in the forests, caves and mountains. He inflicted serious losses on the Italian army, although the latter was much better equipped and numerically superior.
Finally, at the beginning of the 1930s, Mussolini took radical measures to wipe out the resistance. Repression became extremely brutal and one of the main butchers, General Rodolfo Graziani, worte : “Italian soldiers were convinced that hey had been entrusted with a noble and civilising mission … They owed it to themselves to fulfil this humane duty at whatever cost … If the Libyans cannot be convinced of the fundamental benefits of what has been proposed to them, then Italians must wage a continual struggle against them and can destroy the entire Libyan population in order to bring peace, the peace of the cemetery …”
In 2008, Silvio Berlusconi paid compensation to Libya for these colonial crimes. Of course it was based on ulterior motives. Berlusconi wanted to get himself into Gaddafi’s good books in order to facilitate economic partnerships. Nevertheless, one can say that the Libyan people suffered terribly under colonialism. It would be no exaggeration to speak in terms of genocide.

Omar Al Mokhtar

How did Libya win its Independence ?
While the Italian colonists were suppressing the resistance in Cyrenaica, the Senoussis leader, Idriss, exiled himself in Egypt in order to negotiate with the British. After the Second World War, the European colonial empire was gradually dismantled and Libya became independent in 1951. Supported by Britain, Idriss took power. However, part of the Libyan bourgeoisie, under the influence of Arab nationalism that was developing in Cairo, wanted Libya to become part of Egypt. But the imperialists did not want to see a great Arab nation formed. They therefore supported the independence of Libya by putting their puppet, Idriss into power.

Did King Idriss go along with all this ?
Absolutely. At independence, the three regions that made up Libya – Tripolitana, Fezzan and Cyrenaica – found themselves united in a federal system. But it should be borne in mind that Libya is three times larger than France. Because of a lack of infrastructure, the borders of this territory could not be clearly defined until after the aeroplane had been invented. And in 1951, the country only had 1 million inhabitants. Furthermore, the three regions that had just been united had a very different culture and history. Finally, the country lacked roads linking the regions to facilitate communication. Libya was in fact at a very backward stage, and it was not a true nation.Can you explain this concept ?
The nation state is a concept linked to the appearance of the bourgeoisie and of capitalism. In Europe in the middle ages, the capitalist bourgeoisie desired to spread its business interests on as wide a scale as possible, but was impeded in by all the constraints of the feudal system. Territories were divided up into numerous tiny entities which imposed on merchants a large number of taxes if they wanted to transport merchandise from one place to another. And this is without taking into account the various obligations they had to perform for the feudal lords. All these obstacles were removed by the capitalist bourgeois revolutions which allowed them to create nation-states, and big national markets, without obstacles.
But the Libyan nation was created at a time when it was still at a pre-capitalist stage. It lacked the infrastructure ; a large part of the population was nomadic and impossible to control ; divisions within society were very strong ; slavery was still practised. Furthermore King Idriss had no plan for developing the country. He was entirely dependent on US and British aid.

Why did he receive the support of the US and Britain ? Was it to do with oil ?
In 1951 Libyan oil had not yet been discovered. But the Anglo-Saxons had military bases in the country because it occupies a strategic position from the point of view of control of the Red Sea and the Mediterranean.
It was only in 1954 that a rich Texan, Nelson Bunker Hunt, discovered Libyan oil. At the time Arab oil was being sold at around 90c a barrel. But Libyan oil was bought for 30c because the country was so backward. It was perhaps the poorest in Africa.

But money was nevertheless coming in thanks to oil. What was it used for ?
King Idriss and his Senoussis clan enriched themselves personally. They also distributed part of the oil revenues to the heads of other tribes in order to pacify tensions. A small élite developed thanks to the oil trade and some infrastructure was built, principally along the Mediterranean coast, the area of greatest importance for external trade. But the rural areas in the heart of the country remained very poor and large numbers of the poor began to flood into slums around the cities. This continued until 1969 when three officers overthrew the king, one of whom was Gaddafi.

How come the revolution was carried out by army officers ?
In a country deeply rent by tribal divisions, the army was in fact the only national institution. Libya as such did not exist except through its army. Alongisd this, King Idriss’s Senoussis had their own militia. But in the national army, Libyans from the different regions could get to know each other.
Gaddafi had at first developed as part of a Nasserite group, but then came to understand that this organisation would not be able to overthrow the monarchy, so he joined the army. The three officers who overthrew King Idriss were very much influenced by Nasser. Gamal Abdel Nasser was himself an officer in the Egyptian army that overthrew King Farouk. Inspired by socialism, Nasser was opposed to the interference of foreign neo-colonialism and preached the unity of the Arab world. Moreover he nationalised the Suez Canal, which had until then been managed by France and the UK, which attracted the hostility of the West and bombing in 1956.
The revolutionary pan-Arabism of Nasser was a major influence in Libya, especially in the army and over Gaddafi. The Libyan officers who carried out the coup d’état in 1969 were following the same agenda as Nasser.

What were the effects of the revolution on Libya ?
Gaddafi had two options. Either he could leave Libyan oil in the hands of western companies, as King Idriss had done – with Libya becoming like one of the oil monarchies of the Gulf where slavery is still practised, women have no rights and European architects can indulge themselves in building all kinds of bizarre constructions with astronomical budgets supplied at the end of the day from the wealth of the Arab peoples. Or he could follow the road of independence from the neo-colonial powers. Gaddafi chose the second option. He nationalised Libyan oil, greatly angering the imperialists.
In the 1950s a joke went round the White House at the time of the Eisenhower administration, which under Reagan was turned into an actual political theory. How do you tell good Arabs from bad Arabs ? A good Arab does was the US tells him. In return he gets aeroplanes, is permitted to deposit his money in Switzerland, is invited to Washington, etc. These are the people Eisenhower and Reagan called good Arabs – the Kinds of Saudi Arabia and Jordan, the Sheikhs and Emirs of Kuwait and the Gulf, the Shah of Iran, the King of Morocco and, of course, King Idris of Libya. The bad Arabs ? Those were the ones who did not obey Washington : Nasser, Gaddafi and later Saddam …

All the same, Gadaffi is not very …
Gaddafi is not a bad Arab because he ordered the crowd to be fired on. The same thing was done in Saudi Arabia or in Bahrain and the leaders of those countries still receive all the honours the West can confer. Gaddafi is a bad Arab because he nationalised Libyan oil, which the western companies believed – until the 1969 revolution, to be their own. By doing this, Gaddafi brought about positive changes in Libya in what concerns infrastructure, education, health, the position of women, etc.Well, Gaddafi overthrew the monarchy, nationalised oil, opposed the imperial powers and brought about positive changes in Libya. Nevertheless, 40 years later, he is a corrupt dictator which suppresses all opposition and who is once again opening his country to western companies. How do you explain that change ?
From the start, Gaddafi was opposed to the great colonial powers and generously supported various liberation movements throughout the world. I think he was very good for that reason. But to give the full picture, it is also necessary to mention that the Colonel was an anti-communist. In 1971, for example, he sent back to Sudan an aeroplane which was carrying Sudanese communist dissidents who were immediately executed by President Nimeiri.
The truth is that Gaddafi has never been a great visionary. His revolution was a bourgeois national revolution and what he established in Libya was state capitalism. To understand how his regime lost its way, we must analyse the context – which has gone against it – and also the personal mistakes made by Gaddafi.
First of all, we have seen that Gaddafi had to start from scratch in Libya. The country was very backward. There were no educated people at his disposal or strong working class to support the revolution. Most of the people who had received education were members of the élite who had bartered Libya’s wealth to the neo-colonial powers. Obviously these people weren’t going to support the revolution and most of them left the country in order to organise opposition from abroad.
Besides, the Libyan officers who overthrew King Idriss were much influenced by Nasser. Egypt and Libya sought to tie up a strategic partnership. But when Nasser died in 1970, this project was dead in the water and Egypt became a counter-revolutionary country aligned with the West. The new Egyptian president, Anwar Sadat, allied himself with the US, progressively liberalised the country’s economy and entered into an alliance with Israel. A brief conflict even broke out with Libya in 1977, Imagine the situation in which Gaddafi found himself : the country which had inspired him and with which he had been hoping to set up an important alliance had suddenly become an enemy !
Another element of the situation worked against the Libyan revolution : the major fall in oil revenues during the 1980s. In 1973, at the time of the Israeli-Arab war, the oil-producing countries decided to impose an embargo that caused the price of a barrel of oil to shoot up. This embargo brought about the first great transfer of wealth from the North in the direction of the South. But during the 1980s there also took place what one could call an oil counter-revolution orchestrated by Reagan and the Saudis. Saudi Arabia increased its production considerably and flooded the market, causing a massive drop in prices. The barrel went down from $35 to $8.

Wasn’t Saudi Arabia shooting itself in the foot ?
Of course this had a negative impact on the Saudi economy. But oil is not the most important thing for Saudi Arabia. Its relationship with the US matters most, because it is the support of Washington that allows the Saudi dynasty to stay in power.
This tidal wave affecting the oil price proved catastrophic for several petrol-producing countries who fell into debt. All this happened only 10 years after Gaddafi came to power. The Libyan leader, who came from nothing, was seeing the only means he had to build anything disappear like molten snow as the oil money dwindled.
It should also be borne in mind that this oil counter revolution also accelerated the collapse of the USSR which at the time was bogged down in Afghanistan. With the disappearance of the Soviet bloc, Libya lost its major source of political support and found itself isolated on the international scene, and moreover featured on the Reagan administration’s list of terrorist states and was subjected to a whole series of sanctions.

What were Gaddafi’s mistakes ?
As I have said, he wasn’t a great visionary. The theory developed in connection with his Green Book is a mix of anti-imperialism, Islamism, nationalism, state capitalism and other things. Besides his lack of political vision, Gaddafi made a serious mistake in attacking Chad in the 1970s. Chad is Africa’s 5th largest country and the Colonel, no doubt feeling Libya was too small to accommodate his megalomanic ambitions, annexed the Aozou Strip. It is true that historically the Senoussis Brotherhood had exercised its influence on this region. And in 1945 the French Foreign Minister, Pierre Laval, wanted to buy off Mussolini by offering him the Aozou Strip[i]. But in the end Mussolini drew close to Hitler and the deal remained a dead letter.
Gaddafi nevertheless wanted to annexe this territory and engaged in a struggle against Paris for influence over this former French colony. In the end, the US, France, Egypt, Sudan and other reactionary forces in the region supported the Chadian army which defeated the Libyan trops. Thousands of soldiers and large quantities of arms were captured. The President of Chad, Hissène Habré, sold these soldiers on to the Reagan administration ; and the CIA used them as mercenaries in Kenya and Latin America.
But the Libyan revolution’s biggest mistake was to have bet too heavily on its oil. It is human resources that are a country’s greatest wealth. You cannot succeed in a revolution if you do not develop national harmony, social justice and a fair distribution of wealth.
However, the Colonel never eliminated the discriminatory practices that had long been a tradition in Libya. How can you mobilise the population if you do not prove to the Libyans that whatever their ethnic or tribal backgrounds, all are equal and can work together for the good of the nation ? The majority of the Libyan population is Arab, speaks the same language and shares the same religion. Ethnic diversity is not very important. It would have been possible to abolish all discrimination in order to mobilise the population.
Gadaffi was also incapable of educating the Libyan people in revolutionary matters. He did not raise the level of political consciousness of citizens and did not build a party to support the revolution.

Nevertheless, in accordance with his 1975 Green Book, he did set up people’s committees, a kind of direct democracy.
This attempt at direct democracy was influenced by Marxist-Leninist concepts. But these people’s committees in Libya were not based on any political analysis, or any clear ideology. They failed. Neither did Gaddafi build a political party to support his revolution. In the end, he cut himself off from the people. The Libyan revolution became a one-man project. Everything revolved around this charismatic leader divorced from reality. And while a gulf opened up between the leader and his people, force and repression step in to fill the void. Excess began to follow excess, corruption expanded and tribal differences crystallised.
Today these divisions have come to the forefront in the Libyan crisis. There is of course a part of Libyan youth that is tired of the dictatorship and has been influenced by events in Tunisia and Egypt. But these popular sentiments are being taken advantage of by the opposition in the east of the country which is after its share of the cake, the distribution of wealth having been very unequal under the Gaddafi regime. It will not belong before the real contradictions see the light of day.
Moreover we don’t know a great deal about this opposition movement. Who are they ? What is their programme ? If they really wanted to wage a democratic revolution, why have they resorted to he flags of King Idriss, symbols of the time when Cyrenaica was the country’s dominant province ? If you are part of a country’s opposition, and as a patriot you want to overthrow your government, you must try to do this correctly. You do not cause a civil war in your own country and you do not put it at risk of balkanisation.

In your view, it is no longer just a question of a civil war resulting from contradictions between different Libyan clans ?
It’s worse, I think. There have already been inter-tribal contradictions but they have never been so widespread. Here the US is fanning the flames of these tensions in order to be able to intervene militarily in Libya. From the very first days of the insurrection, the Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, was suggesting arming the opposition. From early on the opposition organised by the National Council refused all foreign interference on the part of foreign powers because they knew that any such interference would discredit their movement. But today some of the opposition are calling for armed intervention.
Since this conflict broke out, President Obama has called for all possible options to be considered and the US Senate is calling on the international community to impose a no-fly zone over Libyan territory, which would be a real act of war. Moreover the nuclear aircraft carrier, USS Enterprise, which was stationed in the Gulf of Aden to counter piracy, has travelled up to the Libyan coast. Two amphibian ships, USS Kearsage and USS Ponce, with several thousands of marines and fleets of combat helicopters aboard, have also been stationed in the Mediterranean.
Last week, Louis Michel, former EU Development and Humanitarian Aid commissioner, forcefully raised the question in a TV studio as to which government would have courage to make the case to its parliament for the necessity of military intervention in Libya. But Louis Michel never demanded any such intervention in Egypt or Bahrain. Why was that ?

Is the repression not more violent in Libya ?
The repression was very violent in Egypt but NATO never sent warships to the Egyptian coast to threaten Mubarak. There was merely an appeal to find a democratic solution.
In the case of Libya, it is necessary to be very careful with the information that reaches us. One day there is talk of 2,000 deaths, and the next day the count is revised to 300. It was also being said from the very start of the crisis that Gaddafi was bombing his own people, but the Russian army, which is observing the situation by satellite, has officially given lie to that information. If NATO is preparing to intervent militarily in Libya, we can be sure that the dominant information media are going to spread their usual war propaganda.
In fact the same thing happened in Romania with Ceausescu. On Christmas Eve, 1989, the Belgian prime minister, Wilfred Martiens, made a speech on television. He claimed that Ceaucescu’s security forces had just killed 12,000 people. It was untrue. The images of the famous Timosoara massacre also did the rounds all over the world. They were aimed at proving the mindless violence of the Romanian president. But it was proved later on that it was all staged. Bodies had been pulled out of morgues and placed in trenches in order to impress journalists. It was also said that the communists had poisoned the water, that Syrian and Palestinian mercenaries were present in Romania, or even that Ceaucescu had trained orphans as killing machines. It was all pure propaganda aimed at destabilising the regime.
In the end Ceaucescu and his wife were killed after a kangaroo court trial lasting 55 minutes. Of course, the Romanian president, like Gaddafi, was no choir boy. But what has happened since ? Romania has become a European semi-colony. Its cheap labour power is exploited. Numerous services have been privatised for the benefit of western companies and they are financially out of reach for a large part of the population. And now every year there is no shortage of Romanians who go to weep on Ceaucescu’s tomb. The dictatorship was a terrible thing, but after the country was destroyed economically, it’s even worse.

Why did the US want to overthrow Gaddafi ? For the last ten years or so, the Colonel has been quite amenable to the West and privatised a large party of the Libyan economy, benefitting western companies in the process.
One must analyse all these events in the light of the new balance of forces in the world. The imperialist powers are in decline, while other forces are on the rise. Recently China offered to buy the Portuguese debt ! In Greece, the population is more and more hostile to this European Union that it perceives as a cover for German imperialism. Similar feelings are growing in the countries of the East. Furthermore, the US attacked Iraq in order to get control of its oil, but in the end only one US company is benefiting ; the rest of the oil is being exploited by Malaysian and Chinese companies. In short, imperialism is in crisis.
In addition, the Tunisian revolution really took the West by surprise. The fall of Mubarak even more so. Washington is attempting to regain its influence over these popular movements but its control is slipping away. In Tunisia, prime minister Mohamed Ghannouchi, a straightforward product of the Ben Ali dictatorship, was meant to control the transition, creating the illusion of change. But the people’s determination forced him to resign. In Egypt, the US was relying on the army to keep an acceptable system in place. But I have received information confirming that in very many military barracks around the country, young officers are organising themselves in revolutionary committees in support of the Egyptian people. They have even arrested certain officers associated with the Mubarak regime.
The region could well escape US control. Intervention in Libya would allow Washington to smash this revolutionary movement and stop it spreading to the rest of the Arab world and to Africa. Since last week, the young have been rising in Burkina Faso but the media are quiet about this. As they are about the demonstrations taking place in Iraq.
Another danger for the US is the possible emergence of anti-imperialist governments in Tunisia and Egypt. Should this happen, Gaddafi would no longer be isolated and could renege on the agreements concluded with the West. Libya, Egypt and Tunisia could unite to form an anti-imperialist bloc. With all the resources they have at their disposal, especially Gaddafi’s large foreign reserves, the thre of them could become a major regional power – probably more important than Turkey.

Yet Gaddafi supported Ben Ali when the Tunisian people rebelled.
That goes to show to what extent he is weak, isolated and out of touch with reality. But the changing balance of forces in the region could change matters. Gaddafi could shift his rifle to the other shoulder – it wouldn’t be for the first time.

How could the situation in Libya pan out ?
The western powers and the so-called opposition movement have rejected Chavez’s offer of mediation. This means that they are not interested in a peaceful solution to the conflict. But the effects of a NATO intervention would be disastrous. We have seen what that did to Kosovo or Afghanistan.
Moreover, military aggression could encourage Islamic groups to enter Libya who might be able to seize major arms caches there. Al Qaeda could infiltrate and turn Libya into a second Iraq. Besides, there are aready armed groups in Niger that nobody has ben able to control. Their influence could extend to Libya, Chad, Mali and Algeria. By preparing for military intervention, imperialism is in the process of opening the gates of Hell.
To conclude, the Libyan people deserve better than this opposition movement that is plunging the country into chaos. They need a real democratic movement to replace the Gaddafi regime and bring about social justice. In any case, the Libyans do not deserve military aggression. The retreating imperialist forces seem nevertheless to be preparing a counter-revolutionary offensive in the Arab World. Attacking Libya is their emergency solution. But they will be shooting themselves in the feet.

Source

Fascism: Origins and Ideology

1 Feb

Post War Chaos

The social and political upheaval that accompanied the end of World War I fused the various attitudes (elitism, racism, irrationalism, anti-modernism) that characterized the radical right of the early years of the century into a cohesive political movement, fascism.

Fascism was nurtured in the atmosphere of chaos, uncertainty, disillusionment, and rebellion that swept the world in 1919.  Demobilized soldiers returned home to face unemployment, bread lines, strikes and riots.  The successful communist revolution in Russia and the growth of an international communist movement panicked the established order, especially business interests who felt that their social, economic, and political positions were directly threatened.  Many thought that a force willing and able to resort to unlimited counter-revolutionary violence was necessary to remedy the situation.

Street fighting in Berlin (1919)

Mussolini Comes to Power in Italy

Just such a force appeared in Italy.  Seemingly coming out of nowhere, black-uniformed paramilitary groups led by a former socialist turned ultra-nationalist Benito Mussolini stepped into the fray.  Nicknamed the “Blackshirts,” Mussolini’s squads brutally attacked socialists, communists, trade unionists and their sympathizers.  Soon, Mussolini’s squads attracted the attention of Italian businessmen who saw them as their best guarantee against the rising tide of revolution.  Support and money started to flow to Mussolini’s Fascisti di Combattimento or “Combat Units.” Making full use of the prevailing mood of chaos, the fascists combined extreme violence, passionate anti-communism and brute force to propel them to the forefront of Italian politics.  By 1921, the socialists and communists had been routed; and, backed up by his private army of Blackshirts, Mussolini becomes Italy’s main power broker.  Hailed by his followers as Il Duce (“the Leader”), Mussolini rallies the fascists to march on Rome on October 22, 1922; an act that intimidates Italian King Victor-Emmanuel into naming Mussolini as Prime Minister. Mussolini used his Blackshirts to brutalize any and all opposition, and, by 1925 his power was complete. The fascist dictatorship had begun.

Mussolini (center) and leading Fascists (1922)

The Fascist National Party, as it called itself after 1921, was governed by a Fascist Grand Council headed by Mussolini. In fact, however, power was much more diffused in Fascist Italy than appeared on the surface. The base of the fascist movement was the Blackshirt foot soldiers, the ‘squadristi.’ These fascist squads were controlled by a local boss or ‘Ras’ – curiously, this term comes from an Ethiopian term for a chieftain. Every neighborhood, city, and province had a Ras who operated as a near independent power in his region. Thus, despite Fascist propaganda which loudly claimed a monolithic unity behind its Duce, Mussolini never had complete freedom of action and always had to take into account the wishes and rivalries of the fascist bosses.

Il Duce Speaks

More effective at propaganda than at actually ruling, the fascist government quite often operated as more of a Mafia-like patronage structure than as an efficiently running state.  This despite fascist claims of establishing a modern, streamlined, disciplined system.  As for the name ‘fascism’ itself, there is some dispute as to its origin.  On the one hand there is the Italian word fascio, meaning a unit or detachment; on the other there is the fasces, a symbol of state authority in ancient Rome, that consisted of an axe in a bundle of rods.  The fascists will take this ancient symbol and make it their emblem.  Often contradictory, fascist thought claimed to reject liberalism and communism and to embrace authority, hierarchy and perpetual action and mobilization.  The fascist slogan of “Credire! Obbedire!  Combattire!” (“Believe!  Obey!  Fight!) embodied this sense of militarization as did the Fascist Decalogue, which every school child had to memorize:

  • Know that the Fascist and in particular the soldier, must not believe in perpetual peace.
  • Days of imprisonment are always deserved.
  • The nation serves even as a sentinel over a can of petrol.
  • A companion must be a brother, first, because he lives with you, and secondly because he thinks like you.
  • The rifle and the cartridge belt, and the rest, are confided to you not to rust in leisure, but to be preserved in war.
  • Do not ever say “The Government will pay . . . ” because it is you who pay; and the Government is that which you willed to have, and for which you put on a uniform.
  • Discipline is the soul of armies; without it there are no soldiers, only confusion and defeat.
  • For a volunteer there are no extenuating circumstances when he is disobedient.
  • One thing must be dear to you above all: the life of the Duce.
  • Mussolini is always right.

The fascist regime touted its achievements in expanding the educational  system and leisure-time activities, giving monetary bonuses to large families and embarking on major construction projects. Especially prestigious was an agreement with the Catholic Church which, for the first time, recognized an Italian government as legitimate. In economics, fascism promoted the idea of national self-sufficiency and large labor unions which were merged with corporate management, the corporate state. In reality, production declined, wages fell and big business and industrial interests dominated the fascist state.

Flag of the Fascist National Party (note fasces)

Fascism Defined

In 1935, the Seventh World Congress of the Communist International famously defined fascism as “the openly terrorist dictatorship of the most reactionary, most chauvinistic and most imperialist elements of finance capital.” This definition, termed the Dimitrov Formulation (after Georgi Dimitrov, head of the Comintern) provides a solid Marxist foundation for understanding the nature of fascism.  Some further fleshing out, though, is needed in order to fully distinguish fascism from other forms of bourgeois repression; for fascism is a very specific type of bourgeois dictatorship with its own unique features.

A problem here arises because, unlike other ideologies, fascism does not have a coherent body of thought behind it.  This is, perhaps a consequence of fascism’s origins in the various attitudes that constituted the eclectic radical right of the 19th century.  The closest that fascism comes to having a “Bible,” Hitler’s book Mein Kampf, is very specific to early 20th century German issues and does not function as a unifying text.  Many individuals from different backgrounds and concerns will come to fascism for different reasons.  Thus, there will be what has been termed “hyphenated fascism”:  radical-fascism, clerical-fascism, monarcho-fascism etc. It is often easier to say what fascism is against than to discern what fascism is for.  Moreover, the image fascism projects as a movement is often at variance with the reality that fascism imposes once it comes to power.  There will be two closely related, yet distinct variants of fascism:  Italian fascism and German fascism (National Socialism or Nazism).  However, it is possible to outline some of the qualities which all fascist movements have in common:

  • Fascism claims to be anti-liberal; anti-conservative and anti-communist.
  • Fascism claims to be a ‘Third Way,’ rejecting both capitalism and communism.
  • Fascism strives to establish a nationalist, authoritarian regime.
  • Fascism rejects the idea of class struggle, offering nationalism in its place.  The idea of melding labor and management into a nationalist whole is variously termed, in fascist terminology, National Corporatism (the Corporate State), National Socialism, or National Syndicalism.
  • Fascism actively pursues imperialism and territorial expansion.
  • Fascism rejects reason and rationality, and embraces irrationalism and romanticism.  As such, fascism makes extensive use of symbols, emblems, and uniforms.
  • Fascism encourages the total militarization of society and espouses a philosophy of ‘romantic violence.’
  • Fascism creates private paramilitary militias.
  • Fascism is extremely male supremacist, relegating women to subservient roles in society.
  • Fascism sees itself as a movement of the young, emphasizing energy, health, vitality and generational conflict.
  • Fascism promotes a charismatic, personalist, dictatorial style of leadership; with the leader worshipped as a god-like figure.

Italian and German Fascism Embodied: Mussolini and Hitler

Fascist Irrationalism: Book Burning in Nazi Germany

Italian Magazine Asserting “Youth on the March.” Fascist Militarization and the “Movement of the Young”

German Poster: Worship of the Leader

Although most of its first adherents were demobilized soldiers and street “toughs,” fascism broadened its appeal – otherwise it would have remained a marginal movement.  Industrialists were attracted to fascism for its intense anti-communism.  Large segments of the petty-bourgeois, office workers and small business owners, saw fascism as both protecting them from big business (note the contradiction with the fact of big business support for fascism) and saving them from falling into the working class.  Many in rural areas saw fascism as providing opportunities for advancement.  Thus, fascism became a mass movement.

Fascist movements aping Mussolini’s Italy and, later, Hitler’s Germany, spread throughout the world.  Falangism in Spain, Rexism in Belgium, Peronism in Argentina, the Arrow Cross in Hungary, the Iron Guard in Romania, and ex-Labour Party member Oswald Mosley’s British Union of Fascists in the United Kingdom.  Of the two variants of fascism, the Italian and German, some fascists claimed loyalty to the one, some to the other.  The difference between the two lies in that racism and anti-Semitism, while not a necessary component of Italian fascism, is central to German fascism (Nazism.)

Two ex-‘socialists:’ Mussolini and his British Protégé, Oswald Mosely

The Weimar Republic in Germany

After the German surrender in World War I, and the Kaiser’s exile to Holland, a new liberal democratic government was established, the Weimar Republic.  Led by moderates, the new German government managed to survive threats from both the left (the Spartacist Rebellion) and the right (an abortive attempt to establish a military dictatorship, the “Kapp Putsch”).  However, the Weimar Republic was discredited in the eyes of many for agreeing to the provisions of the Versailles Conference. This conference dismantled Germany’s oversees empire, took German territory and handed it over to the newly created state of Poland, placed French troops on German soil, forbade the existence of a German submarine fleet and air force, strictly limited the size of the German army, ordered that Germany pay billions of dollars worth of reparations to the British and French and decreed that Germany bear the sole blame for the outbreak of World War I.  Indeed, many refused to believe that Germany had even been defeated in the War; preferring, instead, to claim that Germany had been “stabbed in the back” by Jews, Liberals, politicians and socialists.

Street scene, Weimar Germany

This conspiracy theory, that Germany had been betrayed during the War, coupled with the failed communist revolution of 1919 led to rise of ultra-nationalist paramilitary gangs, such as the Frei Korps.  After helping destroy the communist rising and murdering its leaders, groups such as the Frei Korps now directed their anger at the Weimar Republic itself.  Assassination, political violence and right-wing plots to overthrow the government were rife in the early years of the Republic.  One such attempt, the Beer Hall Putsch “uprising” of 1923 took place in a Munich beer hall, hence the name, when a group of conspirators kidnapped leading city politicians who were holding a public meeting in the beer hall.  The conspirators’ plan was to seize the politicians, force them to call out the army, then march to Berlin and overthrow the Republic.  The plot was a dismal failure.  The army refused to play along, and most of the conspirators were caught or killed.  The leader of the conspiracy, an Austrian-born ex-corporal in the German army, was tried for treason and jailed.  His name was Adolf Hitler.

The Beer Hall Putsch, Munich 1923

Hitler and the Origins of Nazism

Born the son of an Austrian customs officer in 1889, the young Adolf Hitler originally wanted to be an artist.  Portfolio in hand, he traveled to Vienna, the capital of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, in 1905 to enroll in the Academy of Fine Arts.  Hitler’s application was twice rejected by the Academy, and, penniless and homeless, he was compelled to eke out an existence on the streets of Vienna.

Painting by Hitler

Many historians and biographers have emphasized the importance of Hitler’s Vienna years (1905 – 1913) in the formation of his thought and personality.  It is in Vienna that Hitler first encounters racist and anti-Semitic literature.  Alone, bitter, resentful, too proud to work, surrounded by “hordes of alien races” (Slavs, Hungarians, Jews); Hitler moves from flop house to flop house, making a meager living by drawing post cards for tourists and spending the little money he had on racist literature and attending performances of Richard Wagner’s  mediaeval-heroic German operas.  Moving to Munich in 1913 to be among “real Germans” likewise ends in failure, and Hitler ends up on the streets again.  It is here, in Munich, that the declaration of war finds him in 1914, and Hitler joins the German army.

In many ways, the army provided Hitler with a sense of belonging that he had not known since leaving home in 1905.  He is several times cited for bravery in combat, and is awarded the Iron Cross, First Class, Germany’s highest military decoration.  This is interesting in that the Iron Cross, First Class, was a decoration usually given only to officers; yet Hitler never rises beyond the rank of lance-corporal.  The fact has caused some biographers to wonder if there was something about the moody loner who preferred to stay in barracks reading anti-Semitic literature rather than engaging in the usual carousing of young soldiers on leave that made his superiors not want to promote him.  In any event, the end of the War finds Hitler in a military hospital recovering from a mustard gas attack.  Like many others, Hitler is shocked at the news of Germany’s surrender and believes that Germany could only have been stabbed in the back by Jews and socialists.  Peacetime leaves Hitler with few options, and, rather than returning to the streets, he takes a job working as spy for the German military police.

Lance-Corporal Adolf Hitler

It is in this capacity that Hitler is sent to spy on a newly formed political group in Munich, the German Workers Party.  In the hothouse atmosphere of 1919 Munich, the military authorities assumed that a group calling themselves the “German Workers Party” would be another communist grouping.  After attending some meetings, Hitler is pleased to report back to his superiors that the German Workers Party is not a communist organization; rather, it is an ultra-patriotic nationalist group.  The group’s name is explained in that it intended to win German workers away from socialism and steer them into right-wing politics.

Hitler joins the group he was originally sent to spy on.  While attending meetings of the German Workers Party, Hitler discovers a previously unknown talent, a gift for public speaking and the ability to enthrall an audience with oratory.  Soon, the one-time spy becomes the organization’s most valuable member, and then its leader (“Fuhrer”). Once assuming leadership, Hitler changes the name of the group to the National Socialist German Workers Party (NSDAP).  The Nazi party, as it became known, is born.

Modeling his party on Mussolini’s fascists (in fact, at this time Hitler wrote a fan letter to Mussolini asking for an autographed picture, the Duce never replied – Hitler would later remind Mussolini of this), the newly formed Nazi Party acquired a potent symbol in the ancient Hindu/Buddhist swastika (in the eyes of some racist theorists, the “Aryan” or white race originated in northern India), an ideology that combined Italian-style fascism with virulent racism and anti-Semitism and built up a private paramilitary militia.  This brown shirt wearing paramilitary force, the “Storm Troopers,” (SA) would be Hitler’s instrument in bullying his political opponents and engaging in street fights with the communists.  Rising to the position of SA Chief of Staff would be one of Hitler’s first political followers, the battle-scarred ex-army captain Ernst Röhm.

NSDAP Banner

SA Men on Parade

SA Chief Ernst Röhm

After the debacle of the Beer Hall Putsch, Hitler is sentenced to five years imprisonment.  The court was lenient on him, and it’s worth remarking that Hitler was only sentenced to five years for treason and, actually, only served eight months of that sentence before being pardoned and released.  During his confinement, Hitler is encouraged by his personal secretary, Rudolf Hess, to put his ideas down on paper.  As a result, Hitler writes Mein Kampf (My Struggle), the action plan of the Nazi movement.  In Mein Kampf, Hitler outlines his philosophy of extreme nationalism, anti-Semitism, and his plans for a new German Empire to be had in the East.  Today, historians debate exactly how much Hitler’s later actions can be traced to Mein Kampf, but the fact remains that much of it is there – from the invasion of Russia to statement that German would have been better off if a “hundred thousand Jews had been gassed at the beginning of World War I.”

Hitler also used his enforced leisure time to do some thinking about the future of his movement.  He concludes that attempts at a violent seizure of power, such as the Beer Hall Putsch, were wrong-headed.  Instead, he now insists that the Nazis must come to power constitutionally, by gaining the support of the two most important groups in German society: the industrialists and the military.  However, after his release, he finds it almost impossible to reign in the rowdy, street-brawling SA.  More and more, Hitler finds that he cannot trust the SA to moderate their actions, and he more and more he finds them an embarrassment and an impediment to winning the support of the German elite.  Thus, Hitler creates a new, disciplined, paramilitary force to serve as his personal army.  Personally loyal to him and only him, this new force from the beginning thought of itself as an elite, imperial guard – in contrast to the beer drinking, back alley fighting SA.  Sporting an all black uniform, this new force would be known as the “Schutzstaffl” (“honor guard”), the SS.  Although at first constituted as only a part of the much larger SA, the SS, and its new leader Heinrich Himmler would play a major role in Hitler’s later regime.

Hitler’s Secretary, Deputy Fuhrer Rudolf Hess

Mein Kampf

Reichsfuhrer-SS Heinrich Himmler

After coming out of prison, Hitler rebuilds his movement and actively courts the army and big business.  Followers such as war hero Hermann Göring, and the intellectual – and master propagandist – Paul Josef Göbbels are instrumental in getting Hitler the support of influential German circles.  The Nazi Party grows in size and strength, but it will take the crisis of the Great Depression to propel Hitler into power.

A Banker and Generals: Hitler and his Supporters, SA Chief Röhm Second from the Right

Hitler’s War Hero: Ex-Fighter Pilot Hermann Göring

 

Hitler’s Intellectual: Propagandist Paul Josef Göbbels

Hitler’s Old Image: In SA Uniform

 

Hitler’s New Image: In Respectable Double-Breasted Business Suit

Hitler Comes to Power in Germany

The poverty, despair and labor militancy sparked by the Great Depression were the factors that led to Hitler’s coming to power.  Nazi strength had grown throughout the late 1920s.  However, many of the people whose support Hitler wanted still kept aloof from “the vulgar little Austrian corporal,” and disdained his band of uniformed ruffians.  The Depression would win them over to Hitler’s camp.  The daily scenes of unemployment and homelessness and the increased militancy of the Communist Party (KPD) caused many members of the German elite to fear that the events of 1919 were about to be repeated.

Hitler’s Enemy: German Communist Party (KPD) Leader, Ernst Thaelmann

By the end of 1932, just as the Nazi Party’s electoral strength was declining, a group of conservative businessmen and politicians, led by the Conservative Catholic Party (Zentrum) leader, Franz von Papen, pressured President Paul von Hindenburg to appoint Hitler as Chancellor (Prime Minister).  According to the Weimar constitution, the German Presidency was a largely ceremonial office; but the President did have one critical power, he appointed the Chancellor, the official who effectively ran the government.  President Hindenburg was seen by many Germans of all political stripes as a bulwark of no-nonsense, traditional German values – besides, he was publicly known to detest Hitler and the Nazis.  But Papen and the politicians were persuasive; they convinced Hindenburg that Hitler was the perfect foil to use against the rising popularity of communism.  Once Hitler and his thugs had gotten rid of the KPD, Papen argued, then the Conservatives would no longer need him, and Hitler would be shunted aside.

Thus, on January 30, 1933, President Hindenburg named Adolf Hitler Chancellor of Germany.  Within two months the Nazis would establish their dictatorship.

Hitler’s Sponsor – and Dupe – Conservative Catholic Politician Franz von Papen

German President Paul von Hindenburg

Stepping Into Power with the Aid of Big Business: Hitler and Bank President Hjalmar Schacht

The Nazi State

In the early morning hours of February 27, 1933, the city of Berlin was shocked to discover that the German parliament (Reichstag) was on fire.  Blaming the Reichstag fire on the communists, Hitler asked for, and was granted, sweeping powers in order to deal with the “emergency.”  The very next day, the constitution was canceled, the right of habeus corpus was suspended and the KPD and SPD outlawed.  Hitler was given dictatorial power almost overnight.  A reign of terror was unleashed as the Nazis rounded up and suppressed communists, socialists, trade unionists and liberals.

The press was silenced; and the first concentration camp, Dachau, outside of Munich, was opened to receive the incoming tidal wave of political prisoners.  Although several communists were arrested and tried for setting the Reichstag fire – including a Bulgarian Communist living in Berlin, Georgi Dimitrov, who managed to refute the charges and later became head of the Comintern – it was soon evident that it was the Nazis themselves who set the fire.  In short, a false crisis was created to justify Hitler’s dictatorship.  In order to expedite the increasing repression, Göring formed a new police organization, the Geheime Staatspolizei (“Secret State Police”).  Eventually becoming part of Himmler’s SS-empire, the Geheime Staatspolizei became the main instrument of Hitler’s terror.  It fell upon some unknown clerk in the Berlin post office to devise a postal mark for the new police agency, and unable to fit “Geheime Staatspolizei “ on to a stamp, decided to abbreviate.  In this way, one of the most fearsome words of the 20th century came into existence: “Gestapo.”

The Reichstag in Flames (February 27, 1933)

Reichstag Fire Defendant and Later Comintern Head, Georgi Dimitrov

‘Life’ in Dachau Concentration Camp

Death in Dachau Concentration Camp

Over the next year, Hitler ‘Nazified’ German institutions.  In a process known as Gleichschaltung (“getting into line”), the German government bureaucracy, military, and civil society – even leading elements of the Catholic and Lutheran Churches – were brought into line with Nazi policy.

Gleichschaltung in Action: The Church Nazified. Propaganda Minister Göbbels is at Right

By the beginning of 1934, most of Germany had been brought to heel.  Only one institution remained in opposition to Hitler: ironically, this was to be his own organization, the SA.  As the Nazi regime extended its hold on German society; the SA felt more and more disenchanted.  Spouting a “share the wealth” attitude, the SA had hoped that a “national revolution” would have reaped benefits. It became more and more evident that this was not going to happen.

Seeing their Fuhrer rubbing shoulders with the elite and wearing white tie and tails as he attend the opera in the company of millionaires infuriated the rough and rowdy Storm Troopers.  The SA Chief of Staff, Ernst Röhm, one of Hitler’s oldest confidantes, started making ominous speeches stating that “Adolf sold us out,” calling for a “second revolution,” and demanding that the SA should become a new German “Peoples’ Army.”  This was definitely not what Hitler’s military and industrial sponsors wanted to hear.  They had cast their lot in with the Fuhrer to prevent just such radical talk.  Moreover, the conservative German military bristled at the thought that an open homosexual such as Röhm, and his gang of thugs, would dare to displace them.  Hitler stands to lose the support he worked so hard to get.  Internal faction-fighting within the Nazi leadership also played a part, as Göring coveted Röhm’s “number two position,” and Himmler’s SS would never get anywhere so long as it continued to be merely a segment of the SA.

Hitler decides to act.  On the night of June 30, 1934, while the SA leadership was on vacation at a small German resort, Hitler strikes.  SS troops surround the hotel where the SA leaders are staying.  The SA men are dragged from their beds, taken into the hotel courtyard and summarily shot.  Many, having no clue what is happening to them, go to their deaths shouting “Heil Hitler!”  Röhm is placed under arrest, taken to Stadelheim prison outside of Munich, and invited to commit suicide.  When he refuses, he’s cut down by the SS.  The bloodbath, known as the Night of the Long Knives, continues until July 2, as the SA leadership is decimated.  There will be no “second revolution” in Hitler’s Germany.

David Lowe cartoon satirizing the Night of the Long Knives: Hitler holds smoking gun as the Storm Troopers surrender to their fate. Behind him, monkey-like is Göbbels; at Hitler’s side stands Göring, dressed as a figure out of German opera. The original caption read: “Now They Salute with Both Hands.”

Territorial Expansion

Three consequences stemmed from the Night of the Long Knives:   The SS becomes a state-within-the-state as Himmler’s black uniformed band assumes all police and security duties (the disciplined SS will become more of a threat to the conservative German officer corps than Röhm’s SA hooligans could ever be); Hitler’s power is now absolute. President Hindenburg’s death later that year gave Hitler the opportunity to abolish the office of President and concentrate all power in himself as “Chancellor and Fuhrer.”  Hitler is now free to pursue his territorial ambitions.  The events leading up to World War II soon will follow.

Hitler Victorious

After World War II was over, an American officer asked Lutheran Pastor Martin Niemoller, an opponent of Hitler recently liberated from a concentration camp, how all this could have happened.  “How could this have happened, in Germany of all places?  Germany, one of the most cultured and civilized nations in Europe, the land of Mozart and Beethoven, the land of science and philosophy.  How could this have happened in Germany?” the officer asked.  Niemoller’s reply has become legendary.  The Pastor said:

“First they came for the Communists; and I didn’t speak up – because I wasn’t a Communist.

“Then they came for the Jews; and I didn’t speak up – because I wasn’t a Jew.

“Then they came for the trade unionists; and I didn’t speak up — because I wasn’t a trade unionist.

“Then they came for the Catholics; and I didn’t speak up – because I was a Protestant.

“Then they came for me – and by that time, no one was left to speak up.”

Caught between the Swastika and the Cross: Pastor Niemoller

Pastor Niemoller’s Reply

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 143 other followers

%d bloggers like this: